Wiggins, a man in love!

[rhubroma]

Or Movistar and Astana.. No I'd be more entertained as I think he'd have a lot more to find! Sky have set themselves up to be shot at right from the off and I too am curious..

I think that generally the tendency in Britain is to scrutinize our own quite thoroughly whilst other countries generally don't quite so much, the press have been very influential and rigorous in this. I think it's quite natural for a journalist who works in Britain to examine SKY or Armstrong for example, although it would be very odd if they were to have a look into what would be going on in Spain, Portugal, Italy, Russia etc, where doping is systemic.

All for a bit of balance me

That's just in the supposed DNA of Anglo-Saxon culture. But what is Britain doing about anti-doping per se? Like France. Like Italy. And you are showing a typical haughty bias when you state, incorrectly, that other countries don't scrutinize their sportsman in the press as heavily as Britain. Is that the case with Football as well? Or just cycling?

At any rate I can name several Italian journalists who, like Eugenio Capodaqua of la Reppublica, have always been ruthlessly critical of the Italian peloton and continue to question its athletes' performances as well as assiduously reporting to the public all the details of CONI, NAS, the Procura in regards to the Italian doping investigations. So yours is just an unsubstantiated prejudice unsupported by facts. While I haven’t read lately, or ever for that matter, about any large-scale and internationally coordinated doping investigations in Britain.

A bit of ballance indeed.

 

[Square-pedaller]

I hope, for his sake, he can speak french on the podium. If he wins this year, that is.

I'm following the Tour on FRance 2 coverage.
Wiggins speaks very good French (one of the best non-native French speakers).

 

[rhubroma]

You beat me to it. He ranted and gave out and gave the I,m tested all the time excuse, as if he shouldn,t be. But never said I dont cheat.

His was simply a carbon copy of the Lance Armstrong propaganda in salsa britanica.

 

[noddy69]

His was simply a carbon copy of the Lance Armstrong propaganda in salsa britanica.

He just does not seem to get the importance of his statements on the issue at the minute. The more he goes on like he is the more people will doubt him.

All he would have to say, not to stop all the doubters, but to send a message out is something like.....Yes I understand that due to circumstances surrounding the tour, especially at the minute ,why the question is being asked. I am completely against doping, it has no place in cycling. I will continue to get tested as I have done in the knowledge that I am drug free. I stand for a clean peleton and a drug free sport , and while the shadow of doubt that some cast on me is unwanted , my conscience is clear.

But thats not going to happen.

 

[gingerwallaceafro]

Lets just remind you of what you stated earlier:


....quite a different point to what you are now saying.

So, if it doesn't matter what Kimmage finds, as you say "good or bad" - then why did Wiggins object to it?

As I said, why should he invite someone into his working environment (especially at the Tour when his head needs to be right). The guy has put himself in a powerful position, agree to it and you have the hassle of someone hanging around who will be scrutinizing you, decline and you're acting suspiciously.

The more I think about it the more laughable it is, sounds like another journo freebie trip to the Tour de France.. Perhaps he might ask for another interview in December or something..

 

[gingerwallaceafro]

You are, (oxy)moronically, the Jezza Clarkson of cycling fans.

I thank you!

 

[rkp5097]

Did he lose the deposit

Did Kimmage lose the deposit on his van.

“It was Wiggins specifically who rejected it. I went over to Manchester, I sat down with Brailsford and everything was sorted. I hired a van specifically for the purpose of following them for the Tour,”

It seems possible. This might have caused him to have a problem with Wiggins.

 

[noddy69]

As I said, why should he invite someone into his working environment (especially at the Tour when his head needs to be right). The guy has put himself in a powerful position, agree to it and you have the hassle of someone hanging around who will be scrutinizing you, decline and you're acting suspiciously.

The more I think about it the more laughable it is, sounds like another journo freebie trip to the Tour de France.. Perhaps he might ask for another interview in December or something..

Transparency is why. Kimmage is disliked for his exploits after he finished cycling. Amazing really, a crusader for a clean sport, a man who likes to expose the cheats is hated more than those who actually cheat. That in itself is a disgrace.
I do agree that having someone around the team all the time could be a distraction, but when it is already agreed and you want to be open, and then one rider says no way, then your doubling suspicion.
First and foremost if it was agreed then Bradley should not have had a veto on it, the team bosses should have final say.What damage could it do ?

 

[rhubroma]

I like Kimmage. His book is great, the sport needs people like him. However, he is prone to the odd mistake because he shoots from the hip, I always thought he surrendered the moral high ground to Armstrong with his cancer comment, and I am still to be convinced of any sky doping. A dodgy doctor - yes.

But some of the comments on this site are pathetic. "i am not watching the tour anymore" after Belles Filles. It was a 5.9k climb where each domestique done about 1.5k. Nothing extra terrestial. The next day, liquigas isolated Wiggins and Froome really easy. Wiggins is beatable, no doubt.

His comments the other day can always be used both ways, as well as if he played it down, I honestly just thought he spat his dummy out a bit but it was an honest response. No one knows if he is doping on here or not, but that is the nature of the beast. It will ALWAYS be that way. I think the sport has got cleaner, but I don't know, like no one else here. I do understand the cynicism though.

What that Lance was "the cancer of the sport," or was it that Lance didn't have a "monopoly on cancer," or something to that effect.

Well, then, we would only be pc hypocrites if we didn't say that Lance was the cancer of the sport and of course that Lance doesn't have a monopoly on cancer as the Irishman did.

I see, therefore, nothing wrong with Kimmage's statements, which in reality simply demanded to be said, however unpleasant they may have been to the those who are always easily shocked and horrified by such statements.

 

[rhubroma]

Thanx for posting that link zam. Wow, just cannot find anything to like about wiggins...sorry to all you fans, but the guy has the maturity of a child...a crass child.

He does seem rather peurile now doesn't he.

And never stare down a Sicilian.

 

[noddy69]

Originally Posted by Poursuivant
I like Kimmage. His book is great, the sport needs people like him. However, he is prone to the odd mistake because he shoots from the hip, I always thought he surrendered the moral high ground to Armstrong with his cancer comment,


He didnt surrender any moral high ground to those who read the piece he wrote in context. Lance did the usual spin that people jumped on who didnt read it.

He said the cancer that was destroying the sport of cycling was back. Looks like he was right all along, but of course rather than answer what kimmage was saying, Lance spun it so he came out of that looking good.

 

[thingswelike]

All he would have to say, not to stop all the doubters, but to send a message out is something like.....Yes I understand that due to circumstances surrounding the tour, especially at the minute ,why the question is being asked. I am completely against doping, it has no place in cycling. I will continue to get tested as I have done in the knowledge that I am drug free. I stand for a clean peleton and a drug free sport , and while the shadow of doubt that some cast on me is unwanted , my conscience is clear.

Agreed. Exactly.

I don't understand why it doesn't happen. Brailsford can nearly manage it. Garmin can manage it.

 

[noddy69]

Agreed. Exactly.

I don't understand why it doesn't happen. Brailsford can nearly manage it. Garmin can manage it.

Its not a difficult thing to do so I dont get it either. The questions are unwanted and its as if they are seen as a distraction,something that can throw a rider as was seen with wiggins. Whoever his advisors are they are not doing what they are paid to do. Getting that wound up about an obvious question you are going to get is suss to start with.

I mean all he has to do is come out against doping. Even if he stated what I said before,alongside..........That is my stance,from now on if questions could be about the race as you all know what my stance on doping is, any other issues can be talked about at a later date....then its done. Then he can answer with,I told you my stance,,,next question.

It is a distraction if its happening every day, if its all your being asked. Why not just get it over with. He is just fueling the fire at the minute.

 

[thingswelike]

I find when I watch him talk - on video, he is much more believable than when you read his statements in text.
He didn't come across at all like LA in terms of body language, but the cold words do sound odd.

 

[Maxiton]

Agreed. Exactly.

I don't understand why it doesn't happen. Brailsford can nearly manage it. Garmin can manage it.

Could be one of two things, or a bit of each.

Kimmage is the mortal enemy of Bradley's best buddy, Lance. Lance would have advised B., on pain of excommunication, not to give Kimmage the time of day.

Or,

Bradley and his domestiques are on a program, and B simply doesn't feel comfortable with this snoop around.

Or,

Best bud Lance is Bradley's doping hookup. Disobey orders, your Tour goes away. Needless to say, Kimmage is a non-starter in this situation.

And as for Kimmage, I don't get why a guy who writes well and is a bit of a celebrity in the cycling world, one of the very few who had the gonads to stand toe to toe with Lance, should have been rewarded by being fired. That's just not right.

 

[Maxiton]

Its not a difficult thing to do so I dont get it either. The questions are unwanted and its as if they are seen as a distraction,something that can throw a rider as was seen with wiggins. Whoever his advisors are they are not doing what they are paid to do. Getting that wound up about an obvious question you are going to get is suss to start with.

I mean all he has to do is come out against doping. Even if he stated what I said before,alongside..........That is my stance,from now on if questions could be about the race as you all know what my stance on doping is, any other issues can be talked about at a later date....then its done. Then he can answer with,I told you my stance,,,next question.

It is a distraction if its happening every day, if its all your being asked. Why not just get it over with. He is just fueling the fire at the minute.

Well, and the thing is, if he had Kimmage with him, that alone would speak to his transparency and curtail a lot of questions. And if the questions got asked anyway, he could simply refer them to Kimmage. "Ask Kimmage. He has the bird's eye view."

Facts which make the absence of Kimmage all the more strange.

 

[noddy69]

Well, and the thing is, if he had Kimmage with him, that alone would speak to his transparency and curtail a lot of questions. And if the questions got asked anyway, he could simply refer them to Kimmage. "Ask Kimmage. He has the bird's eye view."

Facts which make the absence of Kimmage all the more strange.

I dont think the absence of Kimmage is strange. I do however think it would help the image of sky. However the absence of Kimmage and the little bits of info on the doctor paired with the reactions to the doping questions from Bradley alongside the dominence of sky, where a 1-2 is a distinct possibility, and then it all starts to get a bit suspect. Not proven like some would say, but it does make me take a more critical look at sky. They came into the sport with high hopes and transparency and anti doping rhetoric. They are not backing that up at the minute.

 

[Maxiton]

I dont think the absence of Kimmage is strange. I do however think it would help the image of sky. However the absence of Kimmage and the little bits of info on the doctor paired with the reactions to the doping questions from Bradley alongside the dominence of sky, where a 1-2 is a distinct possibility, and then it all starts to get a bit suspect. Not proven like some would say, but it does make me take a more critical look at sky. They came into the sport with high hopes and transparency and anti doping rhetoric. They are not backing that up at the minute.

Of itself it isn't strange, certainly. But given that Kimmage already had the go ahead from the team; and given that Wigans must have known there would be questions; given those things it does seem strange.

And then of course there are the other things you've listed. Couple all that with Sky's ET performances relative to everyone else, and, well . . . we're pretty much at the point of having to call a spade a spade.

 

[noddy69]

Of itself it isn't strange, certainly. But given that Kimmage already had the go ahead from the team; and given that Wigans must have known there would be questions; given those things it does seem strange.

And then of course there are the other things you've listed. Couple all that with Sky's ET performances relative to everyone else, and, well . . . we're pretty much at the point of having to call a spade a spade.

But Kimmage was blocked in 2010 not this year if I read the article correctly, so his absence is normal But the point still stands, why block the guy at any stage if you want to promote a clean image, its the perfect message to send out.

 

[Maxiton]

But Kimmage was blocked in 2010 not this year if I read the article correctly, so his absence is normal But the point still stands, why block the guy at any stage if you want to promote a clean image, its the perfect message to send out.

It's getting late, I totally missed the 2010 part. I don't know, wasn't Bradley on Garmin when Kimmage shadowed that team? That was a huge PR advantage for Garmin, but if Wiggins was there at that time, maybe, in fairness, it's simply the case that he can't stand Kimmage (like his buddy Lance, which I can't resist repeating).

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

I have my doubts about Sky, purely based on the evidence of the last 20 years, however Bradley himself I think is playing a blinder with the media. Big report in today's Daily Telegraph (UK) about how Nibali was spouting off about 'respect' and Bradley gave him the two-fingered salute.

That kind of stuff goes down brilliantly with the British. We love to hear the continentals moan and whine about being beaten - if you look at the comments section you can see the glee of the supporters.

I happen to like Wiggins. I hope to god he isn't pulling a fast one on us (ie doping) because he's a character and he calls a cat a cat (as they say in French). The more upset he gets over doping slurs the more inclined I am to believe him.

 

[noddy69]

It's getting late, I totally missed the 2010 part. I don't know, wasn't Bradley on Garmin when Kimmage shadowed that team? That was a huge PR advantage for Garmin, but if Wiggins was there at that time, maybe, in fairness, it's simply the case that he can't stand Kimmage (like his buddy Lance, which I can't resist repeating).

Dont think so, I believe it was 2008 when he shadowed them.This is the team.
191 Christian Vande Velde (USA)
192 Magnus Backstedt (Swe)
193 Julian Dean (NZl)
194 William Frischkorn (USA)
195 Ryder Hesjedal (Can)
196 Trent Lowe (Aus)
197 Martijn Maaskant (Ned)
198 David Millar (GBr)
199 Danny Pate (USA)

 

[noddy69]

I have my doubts about Sky, purely based on the evidence of the last 20 years, however Bradley himself I think is playing a blinder with the media. Big report in today's Daily Telegraph (UK) about how Nibali was spouting off about 'respect' and Bradley gave him the two-fingered salute.

That kind of stuff goes down brilliantly with the British. We love to hear the continentals moan and whine about being beaten - if you look at the comments section you can see the glee of the supporters.

I happen to like Wiggins. I hope to god he isn't pulling a fast one on us (ie doping) because he's a character and he calls a cat a cat (as they say in French). The more upset he gets over doping slurs the more inclined I am to believe him.

But he isnt getting upset, he is attacking without answering, deflecting away from the questions.

 

[UlleGigo]

It seems possible. This might have caused him to have a problem with Wiggins.

The more pertinent question is, what caused Wiggins to have a problem with Kimmage?

I think the answer to that is fairly obvious.

 

[Cavalier]

Wiggins has now blocked Shane Stokes on twitter. His crime? Interviewing Paul Kimmage.